flip through the whole slideshow. trust me.
April 02, 2009
April 01, 2009
Gmail Autopilot: The best thing EVER
They said it best:
"As more and more everyday communication takes place over email, lots of people have complained about how hard it is to read and respond to every message. This is because they actually read and respond to all their messages."
Check it out! Gmail can now analyze your message and come up with predetermined responses! This should make checking my email much quicker ...
(For more info, see here)
"As more and more everyday communication takes place over email, lots of people have complained about how hard it is to read and respond to every message. This is because they actually read and respond to all their messages."
Check it out! Gmail can now analyze your message and come up with predetermined responses! This should make checking my email much quicker ...
(For more info, see here)
March 31, 2009
This doesn't deserve its own post
Oh well.
Candidate - Lying to someone who wants you to tell the truth.
Candid Date - Telling the truth to someone who wants you to lie.
... It's one of those days.
Candidate - Lying to someone who wants you to tell the truth.
Candid Date - Telling the truth to someone who wants you to lie.
... It's one of those days.
March 30, 2009
"A rags-to-rags story of world domination in information that could only have happened in the Internet age."
Nice piece in the Times on Wikipedia, comparing it to a virtual city:
"Wikipedia can no more be completed than can New York City, which O. Henry predicted would be “a great place if they ever finish it.” In fact, with its millions of visitors and hundreds of thousands of volunteers, its ever-expanding total of articles and languages spoken, Wikipedia may be the closest thing to a metropolis yet seen online."
There's some interesting parallels about things like trust in strangers, safety in numbers, and "professional skeptics," which Wikis and cities have in common.
There are few things that make me happier than a late-night dive into Wikipedia. I unintentionally learned a lot about milk pasteurization standards last night.
"Wikipedia can no more be completed than can New York City, which O. Henry predicted would be “a great place if they ever finish it.” In fact, with its millions of visitors and hundreds of thousands of volunteers, its ever-expanding total of articles and languages spoken, Wikipedia may be the closest thing to a metropolis yet seen online."
There's some interesting parallels about things like trust in strangers, safety in numbers, and "professional skeptics," which Wikis and cities have in common.
There are few things that make me happier than a late-night dive into Wikipedia. I unintentionally learned a lot about milk pasteurization standards last night.
Obscene Tissue Box
Carly and I have been meaning to show this to someone for a while now: Below is a picture of the side of a box of Kleenex tissues that appears to show something it probably wasn't intended to...
If you are having trouble seeing it, just take a look at the white cloud and the shape of the object producing it.
If you are having trouble seeing it, just take a look at the white cloud and the shape of the object producing it.
Foreign advertisements with Domestic Celebrities
After realizing I left this tab open for the last week or so I decided to pass the site along to you: "12 Best Foreign Celebrity Ads." Let me explain, since editors at The Daily Beast, with whom I have taken issue before, apparently don't care that the title could be taken to imply that the celebrities are foreign. In actuality it is US celebrities making a quick buck in super-foreign commercials. My favorite (below) is Snoop Dogg as a German folk singer.
March 29, 2009
March 28, 2009
Turns out it gets worse than a 13-year-old father
A 9-year Brazilian girl aborted twins this month after being raped by her stepfather. Then she, her mother, and the doctor were excommunicated from the Catholic Church, a decision supported by the Vatican.
The worst part of the article? “The law of God is above any human law,” said José Cardoso Sobrinho, the archbishop, who argued that while rape was bad, abortion was even worse.
This kind of thinking makes me unbelievably angry.
The worst part of the article? “The law of God is above any human law,” said José Cardoso Sobrinho, the archbishop, who argued that while rape was bad, abortion was even worse.
This kind of thinking makes me unbelievably angry.
March 27, 2009
cocaine has medicinal uses?
Interesting HuffPo post about the politics and science of Plan B and marijuana laws (explains my subject line, too). The author suggests that pot be moved to a Schedule II drug, and makes a pretty convincing case for it. Not totally sure this will solve the problems (victimless criminals, a money sinkhole, etc.) related to marijuana illegality as well as fully legalizing it would, but maybe it's more realistic. I'd be interested to hear what you guys think.
March 26, 2009
March 19, 2009
Arrogant, Incompetent, and Greedy? I thought Obama was only one of those things ...
(and I mean that in the best way ...)
Just picture someone saying "It's the principle of the thing!" and you've probably got in mind someone who is at least 80 years old, and one way or another could be described by the word "crusty."
Well that's just what's going on with AIG. $165M is a lot of money, but the undeserved portion of that (due to arrogance, incompetence, or greed) is a far smaller number. Generously calling it half, I'll say this $80M is not that much to get worried about, and it's certainly not anything worth upending the structure of our legal system for.
That said, "someone" secretly removed a provision from the stimulus bill that would deal with this issue of AIG bonuses. And no matter which side of the argument you are on, you can bet that when there's a sixth of a billion dollars on the table, Principle can't afford a ticket to the show.
So who might have been a little more than friends with the folks at AIG? Let's check out the top ten list from OpenSecrets.org and see who's been getting the most contributions from AIG in the past 20 years:
An interesting list, to be sure, but still not the way I like it. Let's find out how much AIG has been shelling out to these guys on an annual basis:
Now look, I'm not out-and-out accusing Barack Obama of being corrupt on this one, though I wouldn't be surprised either. But if you're mad about AIG, it's hard not to take a look at this list and think things through.
And honestly, if you really want to know who I think is behind this "secret revision" in the stimulus bill, my money's on Chris Dodd. That's one corrupt (looking!) dude right there. (Side note) And increasingly, the rumor is that his Senate seat might be in jeopardy, something unheard of for a 34-year, extremely powerful Democratic Congressman from a very blue state.
Just picture someone saying "It's the principle of the thing!" and you've probably got in mind someone who is at least 80 years old, and one way or another could be described by the word "crusty."
Well that's just what's going on with AIG. $165M is a lot of money, but the undeserved portion of that (due to arrogance, incompetence, or greed) is a far smaller number. Generously calling it half, I'll say this $80M is not that much to get worried about, and it's certainly not anything worth upending the structure of our legal system for.
That said, "someone" secretly removed a provision from the stimulus bill that would deal with this issue of AIG bonuses. And no matter which side of the argument you are on, you can bet that when there's a sixth of a billion dollars on the table, Principle can't afford a ticket to the show.
So who might have been a little more than friends with the folks at AIG? Let's check out the top ten list from OpenSecrets.org and see who's been getting the most contributions from AIG in the past 20 years:
| Dodd, Chris (D) | $281,038 | ||
| | Bush, George W (R) | $200,560 | |
| Schumer, Charles (D) | $111,875 | ||
| Obama, Barack (D) | $110,332 | ||
| McCain, John (R) | $99,249 | ||
| Baucus, Max (D) | $90,000 | ||
| Kerry, John (D) | $85,000 | ||
| Johnson, Nancy L (R) | $75,400 | ||
| Sununu, John E (R) | $69,049 | ||
| Clinton, Hillary (D) | $61,515 |
An interesting list, to be sure, but still not the way I like it. Let's find out how much AIG has been shelling out to these guys on an annual basis:
| Federal Candidate | Total | Yrs | Annual | |
| Obama, Barack (D) | $110,332 | 4 | $27,583 | |
| Bush, George W (R) | $200,560 | 8 | $25,070 | |
| Dodd, Chris (D) | $281,038 | 20 | $14,052 | |
| Clinton, Hillary (D) | $61,515 | 8 | $7,689 | |
| Sununu, John E (R) | $69,049 | 12 | $5,754 | |
| Schumer, Charles (D) | $111,875 | 20 | $5,594 | |
| McCain, John (R) | $99,249 | 20 | $4,962 | |
| Baucus, Max (D) | $90,000 | 20 | $4,500 | |
| Kerry, John (D) | $85,000 | 20 | $4,250 | |
| Johnson, Nancy (R) | $75,400 | 18 | $4,189 |
Now look, I'm not out-and-out accusing Barack Obama of being corrupt on this one, though I wouldn't be surprised either. But if you're mad about AIG, it's hard not to take a look at this list and think things through.
And honestly, if you really want to know who I think is behind this "secret revision" in the stimulus bill, my money's on Chris Dodd. That's one corrupt (looking!) dude right there. (Side note) And increasingly, the rumor is that his Senate seat might be in jeopardy, something unheard of for a 34-year, extremely powerful Democratic Congressman from a very blue state.
March 18, 2009
Baracketology
UPDATED:
Chris's 2009 NCAA Bracket
Obama's 2009 NCAA Bracket
I just love that the bracket has its own presidential seal.
(And let me add, by the way, that he has Syracuse beating Temple, whereas I have both teams losing before that game even gets played - we'll see who wins this epic showdown of knowhow (of which the president apparently has quite a bit) vs. basic mathematics!)
Chris's 2009 NCAA Bracket
Obama's 2009 NCAA Bracket
I just love that the bracket has its own presidential seal.
(And let me add, by the way, that he has Syracuse beating Temple, whereas I have both teams losing before that game even gets played - we'll see who wins this epic showdown of knowhow (of which the president apparently has quite a bit) vs. basic mathematics!)
How do you heal an amputated limb?
I don't want to give too much away, but possibly the most interesting NPR segment I've ever heard aired this morning, about a guy who had his left arm amputated, only to start feeling intense pain in his phantom limb later on. He wasn't crazy - he knew he had no limb, but his brain was sending him signals to the contrary ("my whole arm clenched up really tight and my nails dug into my palm"). I'm not going to say anything else, so go listen here.
(By the way, I re-listened to this at work, and I laughed out loud both times the exchange ending with the doctor saying "how would you do that indeed?" came up at about 3:20)
(By the way, I re-listened to this at work, and I laughed out loud both times the exchange ending with the doctor saying "how would you do that indeed?" came up at about 3:20)
March 17, 2009
Well played, Missouri
You can argue back and forth about the legitimacy of their actual stances, but I just wanted to shed some light on what appeared to me to be votes that were slightly above-average in principle from Missouri's two senators.
Claire McCaskill has a much easier case to make. She was one of three Democratic senators who voted against Obama's spending bill, along with Evan Bayh and Russ Feingold. She stands out because she and Feingold were the only two Democratic senators not to insert any earmarks into the bill, and both Bayh and Feingold are up for re-election in 2010, while she is not.
Chris Bond - well, I'm doing my best for a Republican ... He's actually in favor of earmarks, but at least he still had the guts to vote for the bill.
This was all part of an article that's generally unrelated, about popular presidents who struggled with issues of unity in their own party.
Claire McCaskill has a much easier case to make. She was one of three Democratic senators who voted against Obama's spending bill, along with Evan Bayh and Russ Feingold. She stands out because she and Feingold were the only two Democratic senators not to insert any earmarks into the bill, and both Bayh and Feingold are up for re-election in 2010, while she is not.
Chris Bond - well, I'm doing my best for a Republican ... He's actually in favor of earmarks, but at least he still had the guts to vote for the bill.
This was all part of an article that's generally unrelated, about popular presidents who struggled with issues of unity in their own party.
March 14, 2009
Roundup of Stewart/Cramer reactions
Yes, the whole thing has been overblown. No, it doesn't really matter. Yes, Jon took some cheap shots, easy to do on his home turf. But to be honest, I agree with everything he's ever said about the news media, both the other night with Jim Cramer (the extended version online is worth watching, btw) and a few years ago on Crossfire. The reaction has been great for both pure entertainment purposes and serious analysis of Jon's role in this crazy world.
Highlights:
Andrew Sullivan @ The Atlantic ("what Stewart has done is rip off that little band-aid of faux solidarity for a modicum of ethical and moral accountability")
"Tim F." @ some blog called Balloon Juice ("For a reason that escapes me, people who are paid to understand politics all seem to think that “access” to people with a PR staff will get them some special insight when the only difference between speaking to them anonymously and asking their spokesperson is that the person can lie and most people will never know. Naturally the public would know if you called him on it, but then he wouldn’t take your calls. Catch 22!")
Bruce Watson @ Daily Finance ("[Stewart] is, effectively, America's fool. In the classic context, a fool was the only one in a king's court who could speak the truth because he was also the only one capable of making it palatable")
Megan McArdle, also @ The Atlantic (she has the problem that many do with Stewart - that he can basically say whatever he wants and then retreat to "don't take it seriously; it's a comedy show." I have no problem with this - people should be able to distinguish news from entertainment, even when they begin to resemble each other - but I'd be interested in what you guys think)
Yes yes I want to sleep to Jon Stewart. Whatever, I have no responsibility to be objective here. I will, however, quit plugging Comedy Central for a while.
Highlights:
Andrew Sullivan @ The Atlantic ("what Stewart has done is rip off that little band-aid of faux solidarity for a modicum of ethical and moral accountability")
"Tim F." @ some blog called Balloon Juice ("For a reason that escapes me, people who are paid to understand politics all seem to think that “access” to people with a PR staff will get them some special insight when the only difference between speaking to them anonymously and asking their spokesperson is that the person can lie and most people will never know. Naturally the public would know if you called him on it, but then he wouldn’t take your calls. Catch 22!")
Bruce Watson @ Daily Finance ("[Stewart] is, effectively, America's fool. In the classic context, a fool was the only one in a king's court who could speak the truth because he was also the only one capable of making it palatable")
Megan McArdle, also @ The Atlantic (she has the problem that many do with Stewart - that he can basically say whatever he wants and then retreat to "don't take it seriously; it's a comedy show." I have no problem with this - people should be able to distinguish news from entertainment, even when they begin to resemble each other - but I'd be interested in what you guys think)
Yes yes I want to sleep to Jon Stewart. Whatever, I have no responsibility to be objective here. I will, however, quit plugging Comedy Central for a while.
March 12, 2009
A question for the floor.
Is there any information yet on Obama's effect on US popularity abroad, especially in the Middle East?
March 11, 2009
Shameless plug for my favorite entertainer
NASA is holding a contest to name their newest "orbiting laboratory." Stephen Colbert has launched on effort to have it named after him. His name currently leads the write-in votes, but he has to beat the number of votes for NASA-picked names to win. So go to here, click "suggest your own," and write in "Colbert."
Because an orbiting laboratory sounds awesome. And forcing Fox and other news networks to report that "Colbert is launching into space" would be even awesomer.
March 10, 2009
Planet, Public Information in Peril
I am in the early stages of trying to restart the green initiative in my office. That the public, even the intelligent and well-educated, is poorly informed on global warming is not surprising to me. Friday night, however, I found myself at a trivia event organized by one of my coworkers and attended by many. When fewer than one-in-five was able to identify "The three Rs of recycling" (reduce, reuse, recycle) I realized the problem was much more grave than I thought.
I'm going to put together a presentation, and I know I'll be facing an audience that is, generally, skeptical. If you have information that might be helpful, I'd love to have it. I'm thinking of things like Wikipedia saying that there is no longer any scientific body that disputes global warming (although I find their citation of this statement insufficient) or like a report I saw that said something along the lines of "The 2007 IPCC report's claims were so extreme they were considered ignorable; however, all data thus far on the effects of global warming has exceeded the report's projections." Basically - evidence that might not be the most persuasive, but at the very least is nearly indisputable.
I put this post together in many pieces so it might be incoherent but should still be understandable. I know this is a chore but any help you can give is appreciated, and keep in mind that I'll have an audience of about 50, at most 10 of whom go about their lives any differently than they would were global warming not an issue, so in terms of impact, your efforts might be getting more bang for their buck than almost anything else you do.
Oh, and I forgot to mention - the impetus for this post coming right now was this article, which claims that even under best case scenarios, we're down to a coin flip at saving the planet.
I'm going to put together a presentation, and I know I'll be facing an audience that is, generally, skeptical. If you have information that might be helpful, I'd love to have it. I'm thinking of things like Wikipedia saying that there is no longer any scientific body that disputes global warming (although I find their citation of this statement insufficient) or like a report I saw that said something along the lines of "The 2007 IPCC report's claims were so extreme they were considered ignorable; however, all data thus far on the effects of global warming has exceeded the report's projections." Basically - evidence that might not be the most persuasive, but at the very least is nearly indisputable.
I put this post together in many pieces so it might be incoherent but should still be understandable. I know this is a chore but any help you can give is appreciated, and keep in mind that I'll have an audience of about 50, at most 10 of whom go about their lives any differently than they would were global warming not an issue, so in terms of impact, your efforts might be getting more bang for their buck than almost anything else you do.
Oh, and I forgot to mention - the impetus for this post coming right now was this article, which claims that even under best case scenarios, we're down to a coin flip at saving the planet.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
